• Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    mid-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California industrial building expert witness Anaheim California parking structure expert witness Anaheim California institutional building expert witness Anaheim California Medical building expert witness Anaheim California multi family housing expert witness Anaheim California production housing expert witness Anaheim California condominiums expert witness Anaheim California concrete tilt-up expert witness Anaheim California landscaping construction expert witness Anaheim California custom home expert witness Anaheim California tract home expert witness Anaheim California retail construction expert witness Anaheim California Subterranean parking expert witness Anaheim California casino resort expert witness Anaheim California condominium expert witness Anaheim California low-income housing expert witness Anaheim California high-rise construction expert witness Anaheim California hospital construction expert witness Anaheim California structural steel construction expert witness Anaheim California housing expert witness Anaheim California townhome construction expert witness Anaheim California
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Construction Expert Witness Builders Information
    Anaheim, California

    California Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: SB800 (codified as Civil Code §§895, et seq) is the most far-reaching, complex law regulating construction defect litigation, right to repair, warranty obligations and maintenance requirements transference in the country. In essence, to afford protection against frivolous lawsuits, builders shall do all the following:A homeowner is obligated to follow all reasonable maintenance obligations and schedules communicated in writing to the homeowner by the builder and product manufacturers, as well as commonly accepted maintenance practices. A failure by a homeowner to follow these obligations, schedules, and practices may subject the homeowner to the affirmative defenses.A builder, under the principles of comparative fault pertaining to affirmative defenses, may be excused, in whole or in part, from any obligation, damage, loss, or liability if the builder can demonstrate any of the following affirmative defenses in response to a claimed violation:

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Anaheim California

    Commercial and Residential Contractors License Required.

    Construction Expert Witness Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Building Industry Association Southern California - Desert Chapter
    Local # 0532
    77570 Springfield Ln Ste E
    Palm Desert, CA 92211

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Riverside County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    3891 11th St Ste 312
    Riverside, CA 92501

    Building Industry Association Southern California
    Local # 0532
    17744 Sky Park Circle Suite 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Orange County Chapter
    Local # 0532
    17744 Skypark Cir Ste 170
    Irvine, CA 92614

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Baldy View Chapter
    Local # 0532
    8711 Monroe Ct Ste B
    Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

    Building Industry Association Southern California - LA/Ventura Chapter
    Local # 0532
    28460 Ave Stanford Ste 240
    Santa Clarita, CA 91355

    Building Industry Association Southern California - Building Industry Association of S Ca Antelope Valley
    Local # 0532
    44404 16th St W Suite 107
    Lancaster, CA 93535

    Construction Expert Witness News and Information
    For Anaheim California

    Power Point Presentation on Nautilus v. Lexington Case

    An Upward Trend in Commercial Construction?

    Building Recovery Comes to Las Vegas, Provides Relief

    Useful Life: A Valuable Theory for Reducing Damages

    San Francisco Half-Built Apartment Complex Destroyed by Fire

    OSHA Updates: You May Be Affected

    U.S. Steel Invoking Carnegie’s Legacy in Revival Strategy

    Study May Come Too Late for Construction Defect Bill

    2017 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure

    Don MacGregor To Speak at 2011 West Coast Casualty Construction Defect Seminar

    The Brexit Effect on the Construction Industry

    Inspectors Hurry to Make Sure Welds Are Right before Bay Bridge Opening

    Lis Pendens – Recordation and Dissolution

    Hurdles with Triggering a Subcontractor Performance Bond

    Reconciling Prompt Payments and Withholding of Retention Payments

    Construction and Contract Issues Blamed for Problems at Anchorage Port

    All Risk Policy Only Covers Repair to Portion of Dock That Sustains Damage

    Mitsubishi Estate to Rebuild Apartments After Defects Found

    Business Risk Exclusions Bar Coverage for Construction Defect Claims

    Texas “Loser Pays” Law May Benefit Construction Insurers

    Ensuing Loss Provision Found Ambiguous

    NARI Addresses Construction Defect Claim Issues for Remodeling Contractors

    Homebuilding Down in North Dakota

    Home-Building Climate Warms in U.S. as Weather Funk Lifts

    Caterpillar Said to Be Focus of Senate Overseas Tax Probe

    Occurrence-Based Insurance Policies and Claims-Made Insurance Policies – There’s a Crucial Difference

    Subcontractor Sued for Alleged Defective Work

    Housing Buoyed by 20-Year High for Vet’s Loans: Mortgages

    Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Asbestos Exclusion in Alleged Failure to Disclose Case

    Is New York Heading for a Construction Defect Boom?

    NAHB Examines Single-Family Detached Concentration Statistics

    Arizona Contractor Designs Water-Repellant Cabinets

    Insurance Measures Passed by 2015 Hawaii Legislature

    Award Doubled in Retrial of New Jersey Elevator Injury Case

    Appellate Attorney’s Fees and the Significant Issues Test

    Bound by Group Builders, Federal District Court Finds No Occurrence

    No Bad Faith In Filing Interpleader

    Wendel Rosen’s Construction Practice Group Welcomes Quinlan Tom

    Deleted Emails Cost Company $3M in Sanctions

    Recession Graduates’ Six-Year Gap in Homeownership

    Homebuilders Call for Housing Tax Incentives

    Suppliers of Inherently Dangerous Raw Materials Remain Excluded from the Protections of the Component Parts Doctrine

    Unlicensed Contractors Nabbed in Sting Operation

    Two New Developments in Sanatoga, Pennsylvania

    Construction Contract Clauses Which Go Bump in the Night – Part 1

    Professional Liability Alert: California Appellate Courts In Conflict Regarding Statute of Limitations for Malicious Prosecution Suits Against Attorneys

    Endorsements Do Not Exclude Coverage for Wrongful Death Claim

    Litigation Counsel of America Honors Partner Victor Anderson with Peter Perlman Award

    Boston Tower Project to Create 450 Jobs

    Despite Health Concerns, Judge Reaffirms Sentence for Disbarred Las Vegas Attorney
    Corporate Profile


    Leveraging from approximately 5000 general contracting and design related expert designations, the Anaheim, California Construction Expert Directory delivers a superior construction and design expert support solution to construction claims professionals concerned with construction defect, scheduling, and delay claims. BHA provides general construction investigation, trial and claims support services to the nation's leading construction practice groups, Fortune 500 builders, real estate investment trusts, risk managers, owners, as well as a variety of municipalities and government offices. In connection with regional assets which comprise construction standard of care consultants, registered architects, professional engineers, and credentialed building envelope experts, the organization brings national experience and local capabilities to Anaheim and the surrounding areas.

    Anaheim California roofing and waterproofing expert witnessAnaheim California window expert witnessAnaheim California expert witness windowsAnaheim California OSHA expert witness constructionAnaheim California construction claims expert witnessAnaheim California architectural engineering expert witnessAnaheim California construction safety expert
    Construction Expert Witness News & Info
    Anaheim, California

    Napa Quake Seen Costing Up to $4 Billion as Wineries Shut

    August 27, 2014 —
    The earthquake that struck northern California yesterday will lead to economic losses of as much as $4 billion, fueled by damaged wineries and shuttered businesses that rely on tourists. Insurers will probably cover about $2.1 billion, according to an estimate from Kinetic Analysis Corp., which projected total losses of about twice that sum. Costs borne by the industry may be limited because many homeowners don’t have earthquake coverage, according to the Insurance Information Institute. “The main source of claims could well be commercial claims, those coming from wineries and vineyards and other commercial interests,” Robert Hartwig, the institute’s president, said in an interview today. “It will take a while for the business owners to sort this out.” Mr. Marois may be contacted at; Mr. Tracer may be contacted at; Mr. Hart may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Michael B. Marois, Zachary Tracer and Dan Hart, Bloomberg

    Earth Movement Exclusion Bars Coverage

    March 19, 2015 —
    Damage to the YMCA recreation center was not covered due to application of the earth movement exclusion. YMCA of Pueblo v. Secura Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15249 (D. Colo. Feb. 6, 2015). On October 11, 2013, the insureds discovered a leaking water line in the men's shower, where one of the shower's on/off valves had detached from the water pipe behind the wall. The leak was repaired the same day. On October 13, 2013, the pool deck near the therapy pool and surrounding block walls shifted and collapsed. The insurer admitted there was damage to the property. Several leaks were discovered in the pipes under and near the therapy pool, and the pool lost several inches of water. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at

    Client Alert: Stipulated Judgment For Full Amount Of Underlying Claim As Security For Compromise Settlement Void As Unenforceable Penalty

    March 26, 2014 —
    In Purcell v. Schweitzer (No. D063435 - filed February 24, 2014, certified for publication March 17, 2014), the Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld an order setting aside a stipulated default judgment for the full amount of plaintiff’s claim which had been agreed to by the parties to a settlement agreement, finding that it constituted an unenforceable penalty because the amount bore no reasonable relationship to the settling party’s actual damages resulting from a breach of the settlement agreement. In an agreement settling a breach of contract action seeking $85,000 in damages based on an unpaid debt, the plaintiff agreed to settle the claim and to accept $38,000 in 24 monthly installments, including interest on the unpaid principal at 8.5 percent. The agreement provided that payments were due on the first day of each month and to be considered “timely,” had to be received by the fifth day of each month. If any payment was not made on time, it was to be considered a breach of the entire settlement agreement, making the entire $85,000 original liability due pursuant to a stipulation for entry of judgment for such amount. The stipulation included language to the effect that the $85,000 figure accounted for the “economics” of further proceedings. The agreement also specified that the foregoing provision did not constitute an unlawful “penalty” or “forfeiture” and that defendant waived any right to an appeal and any right to contest or seek to set aside such a judgment. Reprinted courtesy of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP attorneys David W. Evans, Krsto Mijanovic, and Gregory M. Smith Mr. Evans may be contacted at; Mr. Mijanovic may be contacted at, and Mr. Smith may be contacted at Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    A Downside of Associational Standing - HOA's Claims Against Subcontractors Barred by Statute of Limitations

    March 28, 2012 —

    In multi-family construction defect litigation in Colorado, homeowners associations rely on associational standing to pursue claims affecting more than two units and to bring claims covering an entire development. This practice broadens an association’s case beyond what individual, aggrieved owners would otherwise bring on their own against a developer or builder-vendor. However, reliance on associational standing to combine homeowners’ defect claims into a single lawsuit has its drawbacks to homeowners.

    A recent order in the case Villa Mirage Condominium Owners’ Association, Inc., v. Stetson 162, LLC, et al., in El Paso County District Court, presents an example. There, the HOA unsuccessfully sought a determination from the court that its claims against subcontractors were not barred by the statute of limitations. To do so, the HOAs attempted to apply the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (“CCIOA”), which governs the creation and operation of HOAs, and a statute intended to apply to persons under a legal disability.

    Under CCIOA, during the period of “declarant control” the developer may appoint members to the association’s executive board until sufficient homeowners have moved into the development and taken seats on the board.

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Bret Cogdill of Higgins, Hopkins, McClain & Roswell, LLC. Mr. Cogdill can be contacted at

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Jersey School Blames Leaks on Construction Defects, May Sue

    January 28, 2013 —
    The Carlstadt Board of Education recently commissioned a investigation into the water leaks at Carlstadt Public School. The report has not been released in full, but redacted board minutes make reference to "a lack of waterproofing, drainage and clogged or buried weep holes." The investigation is ongoing and the board's business administrator, Pamela Baxley, states that its "ability to recover damages in potential litigation may be impacted should this information be released prior to the conclusion of their investigation." The building in question opened in April 2007, and the leaking began that October. The contractor has fixed leaks, but further leaks have occurred. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    New Home for the Aged Suffers Construction Defects

    July 31, 2013 —
    Although it’s only about a year old, there are already complaints about construction defects at Lubertha Johnson Estates, a property for low-income seniors in Southern Nevada. The 112-unit project is currently the subject of a construction defect lawsuit, with residents complaining about roof leaks, defective gates, and other problems. Jane Ann Morrison, writing in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, also notes that when the director of public housing operations presented resident complaints to the board of the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority, a few defects seemed to have crept into their complaints, errors that weren’t in the one residents supplied to the reporter. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    No Coverage Where Cracks in Basement Walls Do Not Amount to Sudden Collapse

    January 10, 2018 —

    In another of a series of collapse cases arising out of Connecticut, the federal district court found there was no coverage for the homeowner's cracked basement wall caused by defective concrete. Liston-Smith v. CSAA Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206211 (D. Conn. Dec. 15, 2017).

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii
    Tred Eyerly may be contacted at

    Not in My Kitchen – California Supreme Court Decertifies Golden State Boring Case

    November 26, 2014 —
    On November 11, 2014, the California Supreme Court rejected the recent California Court of Appeals decision Golden State Boring & Pipe Jacking, Inc. v Eastern Municipal Water District, 228 Cal.App.4th 273 (2014) which we wrote about earlier by “decertifying” it (meaning that lawyers cannot cite to the case as legal precedent) The decertification removed a decision that added substantially to the confusion as to when an action on a payment bond is timely filed. Even though the decision was determined in accordance with pre-2014 statutes, the case was relevant precedent for construction attorneys when determining time deadlines for filing a claim on a bond. Background In July of this year, the California Court of Appeals for the Fourth Appellate District upheld a trial court’s granting of summary judgment against a project subcontractor Golden State Boring & Pipe Jacking, Inc. (GSB) who sued Safeco Insurance Company (Safeco) for unpaid contract amounts on a project payment bond issued by Safeco. Both at the trial level and on appeal Safeco successfully argued that GSB’s action on its payment bond claim was time barred by former California Civil Code Sections 3249 (now Section 9558), because it was filed more than six month after the period in which stop notices may be filed as provided by California’s Civil Code Section 3184 (now Section 9558). Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Roger Hughes, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean LLP
    Mr. Hughes may be contacted at